Union workers rally at the Capitol in Lansing as Republicans introduce right-to-work legislation in the waning days of the Legislative session last December. It became law, but opinions and studies on how it affects a state's economy conflict. / Carlos Osorio/Associated Press

More

ADVERTISEMENT

LANSING -- One of the most hard-fought changes in Michigan history -- right-to-work legislation -- takes effect today, but its effects are largely unknown and not expected to be immediate.

In neighboring Indiana, the impact is only beginning to be felt one year after a similar law took effect, in March 2012.

Right-to-work laws make it illegal to require financial support of a union as a condition of employment. Michigan, where the once-mighty and still-powerful UAW was born in 1935, is now the nation's 24th right-to-work state.

"Symbolically, it's huge," said Tom Juravich, a professor of labor studies and sociology at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. "In the short run, we're not going to see much catastrophic impact on the labor unions."

As for the impact on the economy, opinions differ and studies conflict. But all agree a right-to-work law is only one element, and by itself, can neither fuel prosperity in Michigan nor transform the state's economy into one dominated by low-paying jobs without benefits.

Indiana has seen 19 consecutive months of private-sector job growth. Its per-capita income grew 3.4% in 2012, more than the national growth of 2.7%, according to statistics released Tuesday. Yet its unemployment rate, which matched the national rate of 8.2% when right-to-work legislation took effect, was pegged at 8.6% in January -- 0.7 percentage points higher than that of the U.S. as a whole. Indiana's February rate is to be released today.

Kevin Brinegar, president and CEO of the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, said the law has put his state in contention for development projects that would not have otherwise considered Indiana.

Since the law took effect, 103 companies have said it is a major factor in deciding whether to locate in Indiana, Brinegar said. Of those, 43 companies representing $1.7 billion in potential investment and 4,900 potential jobs have committed to locating and 29 are in active talks, he said. Of those who committed, seven will publicly attribute their decision to right-to-work rules, he said.

Nancy Guyott, president of the Indiana AFL-CIO, disputes those claims, saying most companies cited by proponents of the change were either already in Indiana or planning to expand there. The Indiana Economic Development Corp. cited Auburn Hills-based auto supplier Android Industries as a company that chose to expand in Indiana based on right-to-work rules. But Android Vice President Dave Donnay said in December that the right-to-work law was not a consideration.

Brian Pannebecker, a spokesman for Michigan Freedom to Work, a coalition that pushed for the right-to-work law in Michigan, said the state might see some immediate impact in new companies locating here, but most significant effects will take a few years to materialize.

Although right-to-work becomes law today, workers who have union dues or fees withdrawn from their paychecks can't fully withdraw financial support until current contracts expire. Even before Michigan passed its right-to-work law, workers had the right to stop paying union dues and pay only an agency fee related to the cost of collective bargaining. Few chose to do so.

Even Pannebecker, an hourly worker at Ford's axle plant in Sterling Heights, said he pays full UAW dues of about $55 a month, despite being able to pay a little less than $50 if he withdrew from the union and only paid the mandatory agency fee.

After fall 2015, when contracts between the UAW, Ford and the other major automakers are set to expire, Pannebecker won't have to pay anything because of the new law.

But even then, Pannebecker said he plans to continue to pay union dues and "work for reform from the inside."

"I totally support collective bargaining, and I don't consider myself anti-union," Pannebecker said. As a conservative, "what I object to is their political activity," and "their political one-sidedness" in favor of Democratic causes and candidates.

Several public employers such as universities, school districts and local governments have signed agreements before the law's effective date that extend financial protection for unions for three years or more.

Guyott said few union members have withdrawn financial support since the law was passed in Indiana, but couldn't give a number.

Union membership in Indiana fell to 9.1% of the work force in 2012, from 11.3% in 2011, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. It's impossible to say how much of that drop is the result of the right-to-work law.

Bob Ludolph, an attorney with Pepper Hamilton in Southfield who has represented management in negotiations in Michigan, Indiana and across the country, said unions tend to become more strident following passage of right-to-work legislation as they try to show their members they are receiving value for the dues they pay.

"They seem to be pushing grievances to arbitration to show they're representing their membership more aggressively," Ludolph said.

Guyott used similar words to describe those on the other side of the table.

"The primary thing we have seen is more aggression from employers at the bargaining table -- more effort to drive down benefits and erode wages," she said.

• 7 p.m.: A candlelight gathering by union supporters at the Rock at Michigan State University, 149 Auditorium in East Lansing.

• 7:45 p.m.: A candlelight gathering against the right-to-work law at the offices of UAW Region 1A, 9650 Telegraph in Taylor.

Right-to-work law challenges

Michigan’s right-to-work law has incited a flurry of court action. Here’s a rundown of the cases pending.

• Federal court: A coalition of labor unions is suing state officials over whether the law violates the U.S. Constitution.

• Michigan Supreme Court: Gov. Rick Snyder has asked for an opinion on the constitutionality of the law, hoping to head off lawsuits in lower courts.

Michigan Court of Appeals: Several state employee unions — including UAW Local 6000 and the Michigan Corrections Organization — are suing over whether the law applies to 35,000 unionized state workers who, they argue, are under the authority of the Civil Service Commission.

• Ingham County Circuit Court: With the support of the American Civil Liberties Union, several labor unions and Democratic lawmakers allege that the state Legislature and Michigan State Police violated the state’s Open Meetings Act by closing the Capitol for several hours while debating the right-to-work measure Dec. 6.

• Wayne County Circuit Court: The Mackinac Center Legal Foundation is representing three schoolteachers in a lawsuit against the Taylor Federation of Teachers and the Taylor School District. At issue is a recently signed 10-year security clause that’s seen as a way of circumventing the law by giving the teachers union extended financial protection.